CMS Offers Hospitals New Medicare Appeals Option

Mark Taylor, HFMA Contributing Writer

Another CMS settlement offer coming in April will apply to claims from $9,000 to $100,000.

Feb. 6—A new settlement offer to resolve outstanding Medicare claims that have been denied on appeal is available for a limited time from the Centers for Medicare & Medicaid Services (CMS). The offer guarantees 62 cents on the dollar for claimed payment and payable on a faster timetable than previously available.

Hospitals and other providers seeking to resolve pending Medicare appeals first must meet tight eligibility standards, according to a
CMS summary.

In November, CMS introduced the Low Volume Appeals Settlement Option (LVASO), which took effect Feb. 5. The initiative aimed at clear a huge backlog of Medicare Part A and Part B only claims. To qualify, hospitals, physicians, and other narrowly defined providers must have fewer than 500
already-denied appeals claims pending either before the Office of Medicare Hearings and Appeals (OMHA, the third stage of the Medicare appeals process) or the Medical Appeals Council (the fourth appeals level) as of Nov. 3, 2017, with no appeals seeking more than $9,000 in individual claim amounts.

In 2014, the American Hospital Association (AHA) and three hospitals filed a
lawsuit against CMS to force it to reduce the Medicare appeals backlog at the Administrative Law Judge (ALJ) level, alleging that CMS was violating the Medicare Act that set a 90-day limit for appeal resolution.

While CMS agreed the delays were excessive, it pointed out that ALJ workloads had dramatically increased and would require more funding to cut the backlog. A U.S. district court judge in Washington, D.C., ordered CMS to clear the backlog by 2021. CMS appealed, protesting the timetable would be
impossible to achieve. The U.S. Court of Appeals for Washington issued a
decision agreeing with CMS, but remanded the case back to the district court.

Assessing the Option

Matthew Fischer, a former CMS attorney now in private practice in Delray Beach, Fla., said qualifying hospitals will get 62 percent return on their claims quickly, “as opposed to waiting, perhaps for years, for an appeals decision that could potentially give even less.”

Sandra Wolfskill, director of healthcare finance policy for revenue cycle and MAP for HFMA, said the latest CMS settlement followed previous settlements.

“The payment offer is not unreasonable, but you are giving Medicare an additional discount,” she said. “You have to ask ‘Am I going to be better off taking the settlement and stop spending resources on these appeals or do I want to continue the appeal process with the belief that I will prevail
at a higher return?’”

Healthcare finance executives should know that beyond the Nov. 3, 2017 deadline for denied claims, there are two filing timelines based on the hospital NPI number, Wolfskill noted. Healthcare organizations with even-numbered NPIs must file from Feb. 5 to March 9, while appellants with NPIs
ending in even numbers must file between March 12 and April 11.

“The offer won’t go on indefinitely,” she said. “Providers must file their expression of interest in the correct time frame to get into the program.

The settlement offer is 62 percent of the net Medicare allowed amount, not 62 percent of the billed claims, noted Wolfskill.

Jennifer Nelson Carney, a healthcare attorney with Bricker & Eckler specializing in Medicare payment appeals, said knowing the slow pace of the current appeal process and the size of the appeals backlog, hospitals “may decide that getting 62 percent of the value of those claims is a
good deal. There is no guarantee at the [ALJ] level. So it’s a question of whether they can afford to wait for something that is not a given, or take the 62 percent and get paid sooner.”

Other Options

Carney said a few years ago there was a perception that hospitals were very successful in prevailing in these appeals.

“But we’re hearing more frequently that’s not the case. If the winning percentage is going down and you don’t know how long you must wait—we have clients with pending appeals from 2014—if I knew I could get three-fifths of it now I might take it,” Carney said in an interview.

She pointed out that CMS also is directing OMHA to expand its alternative dispute resolution, the Settlement Conference Facilitation (SCF) program. SCF offers hospitals and other eligible providers with more than 500 denied eligible Part A and Part B appeals over $9,000 (none larger
than $100,000) to resolve claims. It is separate from the Low Volume Appeals Option. This option becomes available April 18. Details will be posted on the
CMS website.

Hospital finance executives still are assessing whether they will qualify for the settlement offer.

Michelle Carrothers, vice president of strategic reimbursement for Peoria, Ill.-based OSF Healthcare, said her 13-hospital system looked into the Low Volume settlement and concluded it lacked sufficient claims to participate.

Ray Bradley, the director of reimbursement for 20-hospital Bon Secours Health System headquartered in Marriottsville, Md., said that system recently cleared its appeals and is unlikely to participate in the new CMS settlement option.

“Otherwise we would absolutely be interested,” Bradley said in an interview. “These cases get hung up so long in the appeals process that clearing them is something we’d definitely consider.”

Mark Polston, a healthcare attorney with the Washington office of King & Spalding, said it’s unclear whether large urban hospitals and health systems would have fewer than 500 appeals per NPI.

“Many hospitals have more than one NPI, so that could be a limiting factor. I think it’s a good thing for CMS to do and it definitely offers a reimbursement opportunity for my clients and could potentially be a good thing for them,” Polston said in an interview.

Polston a former CMS litigation chief, said receiving 62 percent of the dollar amount owed without any haggling has advantages.

“That’s up to $2.7 million and avoids further administrative costs of appeals,” Polston said. “In addition, CMS will refund any interest providers have paid at the ALJ level and providers get rid of a large volume of appeals they’ve been pursuing for years.”

Polston said if CMS wants to reduce further its claims backlog, it could authorize those negotiating settlements to settle for more than the 62 percent offer, which he called “a take it or leave it proposition.”

More information on the Low Volume Appeals Settlement Option is available at the
CMS website. CMS will host
a Feb. 13 call on the logistics of the settlement process.

Another CMS settlement offer coming in April will apply to claims from $9,000 to $100,000.

Feb. 6—A new settlement offer to resolve outstanding Medicare claims that have been denied on appeal is available for a limited time from the Centers for Medicare & Medicaid Services (CMS). The offer guarantees 62 cents on the dollar for claimed payment and payable on a faster timetable than previously available.

Hospitals and other providers seeking to resolve pending Medicare appeals first must meet tight eligibility standards, according to a
CMS summary.

In November, CMS introduced the Low Volume Appeals Settlement Option (LVASO), which took effect Feb. 5. The initiative aimed at clear a huge backlog of Medicare Part A and Part B only claims. To qualify, hospitals, physicians, and other narrowly defined providers must have fewer than 500
already-denied appeals claims pending either before the Office of Medicare Hearings and Appeals (OMHA, the third stage of the Medicare appeals process) or the Medical Appeals Council (the fourth appeals level) as of Nov. 3, 2017, with no appeals seeking more than $9,000 in individual claim amounts.

In 2014, the American Hospital Association (AHA) and three hospitals filed a
lawsuit against CMS to force it to reduce the Medicare appeals backlog at the Administrative Law Judge (ALJ) level, alleging that CMS was violating the Medicare Act that set a 90-day limit for appeal resolution.

While CMS agreed the delays were excessive, it pointed out that ALJ workloads had dramatically increased and would require more funding to cut the backlog. A U.S. district court judge in Washington, D.C., ordered CMS to clear the backlog by 2021. CMS appealed, protesting the timetable would be
impossible to achieve. The U.S. Court of Appeals for Washington issued a
decision agreeing with CMS, but remanded the case back to the district court.

Assessing the Option

Matthew Fischer, a former CMS attorney now in private practice in Delray Beach, Fla., said qualifying hospitals will get 62 percent return on their claims quickly, “as opposed to waiting, perhaps for years, for an appeals decision that could potentially give even less.”

Sandra Wolfskill, director of healthcare finance policy for revenue cycle and MAP for HFMA, said the latest CMS settlement followed previous settlements.

“The payment offer is not unreasonable, but you are giving Medicare an additional discount,” she said. “You have to ask ‘Am I going to be better off taking the settlement and stop spending resources on these appeals or do I want to continue the appeal process with the belief that I will prevail
at a higher return?’”

Healthcare finance executives should know that beyond the Nov. 3, 2017 deadline for denied claims, there are two filing timelines based on the hospital NPI number, Wolfskill noted. Healthcare organizations with even-numbered NPIs must file from Feb. 5 to March 9, while appellants with NPIs
ending in even numbers must file between March 12 and April 11.

“The offer won’t go on indefinitely,” she said. “Providers must file their expression of interest in the correct time frame to get into the program.

The settlement offer is 62 percent of the net Medicare allowed amount, not 62 percent of the billed claims, noted Wolfskill.

Jennifer Nelson Carney, a healthcare attorney with Bricker & Eckler specializing in Medicare payment appeals, said knowing the slow pace of the current appeal process and the size of the appeals backlog, hospitals “may decide that getting 62 percent of the value of those claims is a
good deal. There is no guarantee at the [ALJ] level. So it’s a question of whether they can afford to wait for something that is not a given, or take the 62 percent and get paid sooner.”

Other Options

Carney said a few years ago there was a perception that hospitals were very successful in prevailing in these appeals.

“But we’re hearing more frequently that’s not the case. If the winning percentage is going down and you don’t know how long you must wait—we have clients with pending appeals from 2014—if I knew I could get three-fifths of it now I might take it,” Carney said in an interview.

She pointed out that CMS also is directing OMHA to expand its alternative dispute resolution, the Settlement Conference Facilitation (SCF) program. SCF offers hospitals and other eligible providers with more than 500 denied eligible Part A and Part B appeals over $9,000 (none larger
than $100,000) to resolve claims. It is separate from the Low Volume Appeals Option. This option becomes available April 18. Details will be posted on the
CMS website.

Hospital finance executives still are assessing whether they will qualify for the settlement offer.

Michelle Carrothers, vice president of strategic reimbursement for Peoria, Ill.-based OSF Healthcare, said her 13-hospital system looked into the Low Volume settlement and concluded it lacked sufficient claims to participate.

Ray Bradley, the director of reimbursement for 20-hospital Bon Secours Health System headquartered in Marriottsville, Md., said that system recently cleared its appeals and is unlikely to participate in the new CMS settlement option.

“Otherwise we would absolutely be interested,” Bradley said in an interview. “These cases get hung up so long in the appeals process that clearing them is something we’d definitely consider.”

Mark Polston, a healthcare attorney with the Washington office of King & Spalding, said it’s unclear whether large urban hospitals and health systems would have fewer than 500 appeals per NPI.

“Many hospitals have more than one NPI, so that could be a limiting factor. I think it’s a good thing for CMS to do and it definitely offers a reimbursement opportunity for my clients and could potentially be a good thing for them,” Polston said in an interview.

Polston a former CMS litigation chief, said receiving 62 percent of the dollar amount owed without any haggling has advantages.

“That’s up to $2.7 million and avoids further administrative costs of appeals,” Polston said. “In addition, CMS will refund any interest providers have paid at the ALJ level and providers get rid of a large volume of appeals they’ve been pursuing for years.”

Polston said if CMS wants to reduce further its claims backlog, it could authorize those negotiating settlements to settle for more than the 62 percent offer, which he called “a take it or leave it proposition.”

More information on the Low Volume Appeals Settlement Option is available at the
CMS website. CMS will host
a Feb. 13 call on the logistics of the settlement process.

HFMA RESOURCE LIBRARY

Patient financial engagement is more challenging than ever – and more critical. With patient responsibility as a percentage of revenue on the rise, providers have seen their billing-related costs and accounts receivable levels increase. If increasing collection yield and reducing costs are a priority for your organization, the metrics outlined in this presentation will provide the framework you need to understand what’s working and what’s not, in order to guide your overall patient financial engagement initiatives and optimize results.

No two patients are the same. Each has a very personal healthcare experience, and each has distinct financial needs and preferences that have an impact on how, when and if they chose to pay their healthcare bill. It’s no longer effective to apply static billing techniques to solve the complex challenge of collecting balances from patients. The need to tailor financial conversations and payment options to individual needs and preferences is critical. This presentation provides 10 recommendations that will not only help you improve payment performance through a more tailored approach, but take control of rising collection costs.

This white paper, written by Apex Vice President of Solutions and Services, Carrie Romandine, discusses the importance of patient segmentation and messaging specifically related to the patient revenue cycle. Applying strategic messaging that is tailored to each patient type will not only better educate consumers on payment options specific to their billing needs, but it will maximize the amount collected before sending to collections. Further, targeted messaging should be applied across all points of patient interaction (i.e. point of service, customer service, patient statements) and analyzed regularly for maximized results.

This white paper, written by Apex President Patrick Maurer, discusses methods to increase patient adoption of online payments. Providers are now seeking ways to incrementally collect more payments due from patients as well as speeding up the rate of collections. This white paper shows why patient-centric approaches to online payment portals are important complements to traditional provider-centric approaches.

Increased electronic engagement between healthcare providers and patients provides significant opportunities for improving revenue cycle metrics and encouraging patients to access EHRs. This article, written by Apex Founder and CEO Brian Kueppers, explores a number of strategies to create synergy between patient billing, online payment portals and electronic health record (EHR) software to realize a high ROI in speed to payment, patient satisfaction and portal adoption for meaningful use.

Faced with a rising tide of bad debt, a large Southeastern healthcare system was seeing a sharp decline in net patient revenues. The need to improve collections was dire. By integrating critical tools and processes, the health system was able to increase online payments and improve its financial position. Taking a holistic approach increased overall collection yield by 10% while costs came down because the number of statements sent to patients fell by 10%, which equated to a $1.3M annualized improvement in patient cash over a six-month period. This case study explains how.

To maintain fiscal fitness and boost patient satisfaction and loyalty, healthcare providers need visibility into when and how much they will be paid–by whom–and the ability to better navigate obstacles to payment. They need payment clarity. This whitepaper illuminates this concept that is winning fans at forward-thinking hospitals.

Financial services staff are always looking for ways to improve the verification, billing and collections processes, and Munson Healthcare is no different. Read about how they streamlined the billing process to produce cleaner bills on the front end and helped financial services staff collect more than $1 million in additional upfront annual revenue in one year.

Effective revenue cycle management can be a challenge for any hospital, but for smaller providers it is even tougher. Read how Wallace Thomson identified unreimbursed procedures, streamlined claims management, and improved its ability to determine charity eligibility.

Before launching an energy-efficiency initiative, it’s important to build a solid business case and understand the funding options and potential incentives that are available. Healthcare leaders should consider taking the steps outlined in the whitepaper to ease the process of gaining approval, piloting, implementing, and supporting sustainability projects. You will find that investing in sustainability and energy efficiency helps hospitals add cash to their bottom line. Discover how hospitals and health systems have various options for funding energy-efficient and renewable-energy initiatives, depending on their current financial structure and strategy.

Health care is a dynamic mergers and acquisitions market with numerous hospitals and health systems contemplating or pursuing formal arrangements with other entities. These relationships often pose a strategic benefit, such as enhancing competencies across the continuum, facilitating economies of scale, or giving the participants a competitive advantage in a crowded market. Underpinning any profitable acquisition is a robust capital planning strategy that ensures an organization reserves sufficient funds and efficiently onboards partners that advance the enterprise mission and values.

The success of healthcare mergers, acquisitions, and other affiliations is predicated in part on available capital, and the need for and sources of funding are considerations present throughout the partnering process, from choosing a partner to evaluating an arrangement’s capital needs to selecting an integration model to finding the right money source to finance the deal. This whitepaper offers several strategies that health system leaders have used to assess and manage capital needs for their growing networks.

Announcements from several commercial payers and the Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services (CMS) early in 2015 around increased efforts to form value-based contracts with providers seemed to point to an impending rise in risk-based contracting. Rather than wait for disruption from the outside in, health care providers are now making inroads on collaborating with payers on various risk-based contracting models to increase the value of health care from within.

Yuma Regional Medical Center (YRMC) is a not-for-profit hospital serving a population of roughly 200,000 in Yuma and the surrounding communities.
Before becoming a ZirMed client, Yuma was attempting to manually monitor hundreds of thousands of charges which led to significant charge capture leakage. Learn how Yuma & ZirMed worked together to address underlying collections issues at the front end, thus increasing Yuma’s overall bottom line.

Kindred Hospital Rehabilitation Services works with partners to audit the market and the facility’s role in that market to identify opportunities for improvement. This approach leads to successes; Kindred’s clinical rehab and management expertise complements our partners’ strengths. Every facility and challenge is unique, and requires a full objective analysis.

Qualified coders are getting harder to come by, and even the most seasoned professional can struggle with the complexity of ICD-10. This 5-Minute White Paper Briefing explains how partnerships can help improve coding and other key RCM operations potentially at a cost savings.

The point of managing your revenue cycle isn’t just to improve revenue and cash flow. It’s to do those things effectively by consistently following best practices— while spending as little time, money, and energy on them as possible.

The reasons claims are denied are so varied that managing denials can feel like chasing a thousand different tails. This situation is not surprising given that a hypothetical denial rate of just 5 percent translates to tens of thousands of denied claims per year for large hospitals—where real‐world denial rates often range from 12 to 22 percent. Read about how predictive modeling can detect meaningful correlations across claims denials data.

Emergency Mobile Health Care (EMHC) was founded to be and remains an exclusively locally owned and operated emergency medical service organization; today EMHC serves a population of more than a million people in and around Memphis, answering 75,000 calls each year.

Since the Physician Quality Reporting Initiative (PQRI) introduction, CMS has paid more than $100 million in bonus payments to participants. However, these bonuses ended in 2015; providers who successfully meet the reporting requirements in 2016 will avoid the 2% negative payment adjustment in 2018, so now is the time to act! Included in this whitepaper are implications of increasing patient responsibility, collections best practices, and collections and internal control solutions.

Getting paid what your physician deserves—that’s the goal of every biller. Yet even for the best billers, achieving that success can be elusive when denials stand in the way of success, presenting challenges at every turn. Denials aren’t going away, but you can learn techniques to manage and even prevent them.Join practice management expert Elizabeth W. Woodcock, MBA, FACMPE, CPC, to: Discover methods to translate denial data into business intelligence to improve your bottom line, determine staff productivity benchmarks for billers, and recognize common mistakes in denial management.

Read more about factors contributing to the changes in the post-acute marketplace and what it means for manufacturers, physicians, clinicians, patients, and post-acute facilities as they anticipate the transition to the second curve.

HSG helped the physicians and executives of St. Claire Regional in Morehead, Kentucky, define their shared vision for how the group would evolve over the next decade. As well as, develop the strategic and operational priorities which refocused and accelerated the group’s evolution.

The client was a nine-hospital health system with 14 clinics serving communities in a multi-state market with very limited access to care, poor economic conditions, high unemployment, and a heavy Medicare/Medicaid/uninsured payer mix. In most of these communities, the system was the sole source of care.
Though the clinics were of substantial size (they employed 98 physicians) and comprised of multiple specialists, the physicians functioned as individuals and the practices lacked any real group culture.

Clinical integration can be expensive, but it doesn’t have to be, as this four-step road map for developing a CIN proves. Does it have to cost millions to initiate a clinical integration strategy?
Contrary to popular belief, we have clients who have generated substantial shared savings and a significant ROI over time, without massive investments. Yes, some financial capital is required for resources the CIN providers can’t bring to the table themselves. But the size of that investment can be miniscule relative to the value it produces: improved outcomes and documentation for payers.

Today’s concerns about physician compensation are the result of the changing healthcare environment. The transition to value is slow, but finally becoming a reality. Proactive hospitals want to ensure that provider incentives are properly aligned with ever-increasing value-based demands.
This report focuses on the three big questions HSG receives about adding value to physician compensation; Why are organizations redesigning their provider compensation plans? What elements and parameters must be part of successful compensation plans? How are organizations implementing compensation changes?

Revenue Cycle Management has become an even more complex issue with declining reimbursements, implementation of Electronic Health Records, evolving local carrier determinations (LCD), and payer credentialing [The emphasis on healthcare fraud, abuse and compliance has increased the importance of accuracy of data reporting and claims filing).
The efficiency of a medical practice’s billing operations has critical impact on the financial performance. In many cases, patient billings are the primary revenue source that pays staff salaries, provider compensation and overhead operating cost. Inefficiencies or inaccurate billing will contribute to operating losses.

This publication identifies and outlines the necessary characteristics of a fully-functioning clinically integrated network (CIN). What it doesn’t do is detail how hospitals and providers can participate in the value-based care environment during the development process.
One common misconception is that the CIN can’t do anything significant until it has obtained the FTC’s “clinically integrated” stamp of approval. While the network must satisfy the FTC’s definition of clinical integration before single signature contracting for FFS rates and contracts can legally start, hospitals and providers can enjoy three key benefits during the development process.

Nearly half of all Medicare beneficiaries treated in the hospital will need post-acute care services after discharge. For these patients, a stay in an inpatient rehabilitation facility, skilled nursing facility or other post-acute care setting comes between hospital and home.

With the proper process, tools, and feedback mechanisms in place, budgeting can be a valuable exercise for organizations while helping hold organizational leaders accountable. Having a proper monthly variance review process is one of the most critical factors in creating a more efficient and accurate budget. Monthly variance reporting puts parameters around what is to be expected during the upcoming budget entry process.

Managing the cost of patient care is the top strategic priority of most hospital CFOs today. As healthcare shifts to more data-driven decision making, having clear visibility into key volume, cost and profitability measures across clinical service lines is becoming increasingly important for both long-range and tactical planning activities. In turn, the cost accounting function in healthcare provider organizations is becoming an increasingly important and strategic function. This whitepaper includes five strategies for efficient and accurate cost accounting and service line analytics and keys to overcoming the associated challenges.